Beyond Agreement: Diagnosing the Rationale Alignment of Automated Essay Scoring Methods based on Linguistically-informed Counterfactuals
원문 초록
While current Automated Essay Scoring (AES) methods demonstrate high scoring agreement with human raters, their decision-making mechanisms are not fully understood. Our proposed method, using counterfactual intervention assisted by Large Language Models (LLMs), reveals that BERT-like models primarily focus on sentence-level features, whereas LLMs such as GPT-3.5, GPT-4 and Llama-3 are sensitive to conventions & accuracy, language complexity, and organization, indicating a more comprehensive rationale alignment with scoring rubrics. Moreover, LLMs can discern counterfactual interventions when giving feedback on essays. Our approach improves understanding of neural AES methods and can also apply to other domains seeking transparency in model-driven decisions.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Turning Sand to Gold: Recycling Data to Bridge On-Policy and Off-Policy Learning via Causal Bound
Thought Anchors: Which LLM Reasoning Steps Matter?
Social Group Bias in AI Finance
CF-Seg: Counterfactuals meet Segmentation
The Role of Explanation Styles and Perceived Accuracy on Decision Making in Predictive Process Monitoring
Towards Fairness Assessment of Dutch Hate Speech Detection
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.